"The poor we will have always with us," or so we have been led to believe. Yet the U.N Millennium goals aim to cut extreme poverty in half by 2015. Is this just a pipe dream?

		Carolyn Ban is dean of the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh. Paul Le Blanc is dean of the School of Arts and Sciences at La Roche College. They are co-organizers of the Oct. 28-29 conference "Global Problems, Global Solutions," at LaRoche College.

In fact, there has been real progress in combating poverty. In the United States, the number of people in poverty has increased for the last four years, from 11.3 to 12.7 percent. But if we look at the problem historically, we see that the poverty rate declined very significantly in the 1960s and '70s. And there has been real progress in many parts of the world, with dramatic reduction of the numbers of people living in extreme poverty (defined as subsisting on less than $1 a day). Nevertheless, the challenges are daunting.

One lesson we draw from the past 40 years is that government makes a difference. The current media coverage of poverty in the United States in the wake of Katrina often quoted Ronald Reagan saying, "We fought a war on poverty, and poverty won." Well, actually, it didn't.

While the Great Society programs were underfunded, given their ambitious goals, they are one of the reasons the poverty rate in the United States fell through the 1960s and '70s. Social Security wasn't billed as a welfare program, but it has dramatically reduced poverty among the elderly. Food Stamps reduced hunger in our country, although one indicator of their inability to meet the full need for food support is that here in our region the Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank provides food, via food pantries, elder and child care centers, shelters, and other agencies for more than 120,000 people a month.

Foreign aid, too, has made more of a difference than critics have led us to believe. Well-targeted aid, administered with safeguards to prevent it from being diverted by corrupt officials, really does help. That aid can come from governments, from international agencies and even from individuals.

There is no doubt, for example, that vaccination works to prevent some of the diseases that have ravaged the poor. The Gates Foundation has provided $1.5 billion to get vaccinations where they are needed and to develop new vaccines. Nonetheless, the dimensions of global poverty are staggering. Of the world's 6.3 billion people, about 1.3 billion, or nearly 20 percent, still live in extreme poverty.

What keeps us from taking what we have learned and applying it both here and around the world? Much of it is a failure of will. Perhaps it is time to breathe new life into the concept of "the violence of the status quo" -- the belief that the poor will, in fact, always be with us. Too many people either believe that the problem is so huge that it can't be solved or that it simply isn't their problem -- they don't have the wealth of Bill Gates, so what can they do?

One can argue that we should all get involved because it is our moral responsibility to help those less fortunate than us, and that is certainly true. But it is also true, as the economist and U.N. Millennium Project Director Jeffrey Sachs has made clear, that reducing extreme poverty significantly will be easier and less expensive than it appears. And ignoring the issue may be more costly over the long run than helping poorer countries develop so that they can participate effectively in the global economy. Many countries have already started up the ladder of economic development. The challenge is how to help them to continue to develop while helping the poorest countries to reach the first rung.

The United Nations seeks to challenge the status quo through the Millennium Development Goals Campaign, endorsed by 191 governments, with eight fundamental goals, to be achieved by 2015: 1) eradicate extreme poverty and hunger; 2) achieve universal primary education; 3) promote gender equality and empower women; 4) reduce child mortality (11 million worldwide die before their fifth birthday every year); 5) improve maternal health; 6) combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases; 7) ensure environmental sustainability; and 8) develop a global partnership for development. (See www.un.org/millenniumgoals/.)

All of us can support President Bush's unambiguous affirmation, in his recent speech before the United Nations, that "we are committed to the Millennium Development Goals." Yet obvious questions remain regarding the best way to realize these goals, and we need a better understanding of the relationship between problems on the global level and locally -- in Pittsburgh and throughout the United States.

Our role as educators is to help provide students but also members of our community with the skills and vision needed to take on the challenge of poverty. More than this, we can help link individuals and groups in our community to work together toward solutions. This includes scholars and students, community organizations and religious groups, labor activities and entrepreneurs, and -- yes -- representatives of our government, who need the imagination and political will to develop new and creative ways to lift fellow citizens out of poverty.

Concerted effort may help us to develop practical strategies to dispel the myth that poverty cannot be eliminated.